Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Wizards get a reminder in Turkey of past two drafts


Don't worry about me just yet. (Getty Images)


The Wizards have been trade partners with the Minnesota Timberwolves over the past two summers and it will probably be several years before both deals can fully be judged. But two of the pieces that Washington sacrificed were on display on Wednesday during Serbia's 92-89 upset victory over Spain in the quarterfinals of the FIBA world championships in Istanbul.

Ricky Rubio was never drafted by the Wizards, but he'll always be linked to the organization since the Timberwolves selected the teenage wunderkind with the fifth overall pick they acquired in a deal for Mike Miller and Randy Foye two summers ago. And, going into Spain's quarterfinal game against Serbia, Rubio was perhaps the most intriguing player to Wizards fans, given all the excitement he generated at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. But after the game, Nemanja Bjelica emerged as another prospect to keep an eye on down the road.

The Wizards drafted Bjelica with the 35th pick last June before dealing him, and the 30th pick (Lazar Hayward), to the Timberwolves as part of a pre-arranged deal to get Trevor Booker and Hamady Ndiaye. And, while he has had a relatively quiet tournament, Bjelica -- a 22 year old point guard trapped in the body of a 6-foot-10 power forward -- made all five of his shots, including three three-pointers, and finished with 14 points in 14 minutes to help Serbia advance to the semifinals.

Bjelica isn't expected to come to the NBA until 2012 after signing a five-year contract with Spanish club Caja Laboral -- where Brazilian forward Tiago Splitter starred before electing to join the San Antonio Spurs next season -- that included a buyout option to leave for the NBA after two years. His unique skill set has drawn comparisons to Toni Kukoc.


You probably forgot about me already. (AP Photo)

Timberwolves' assistant general manager and the scouting director for Team USA scouting director Tony Ronzone, who probably had some influence in making sure the Wizards took Bjelica at that slot last June, told the Minneapolis Star Tribune, "He's young, he needs to get stronger. But he's in a great situation: He's here in the Sweet 16 with Serbia, and he's going to a great team that won Spanish league for the next two seasons."

With Spain considered the primary foil for the United States in Turkey -- even with Pau Gasol passing on the tournament -- Rubio was expected one of the catalysts to help that nation win its second consecutive world championship. But Rubio didn't exactly have the best showing in this tournament, going down meekly with just three points and four assists against Serbia.

In seven games, Rubio averaged just 4.9 points on 27.5 percent shooting, with 5.7 assists, 3.3 rebounds and two turnovers in just under 27 minutes a game. And, after making opponents look foolish with his playmaking, Rubio also was on the wrong end of an embarrassing play when Spain lost to Lithuania in group play.

But looking back, sending the fifth pick to Minnesota for Miller and Foye stands as an unfortunate move for the franchise, since both Miller and Foye spent forgettable campaigns in Washington and skipped town last summer, leaving the Wizards with nothing to show for that horrific 19-win campaign in 2008-09.

I asked Ernie Grunfeld if had any regrets about that deal late last season, when it appeared that the Wizards would likely lose both Miller and Foye in free agency -- and rookies who were available at that slot, such as Stephen Curry and Brandon Jennings, were blowing up with their respective teams. Grunfeld said, "Hindsight is 20-20. It's very easy to say, this is what we should've done. But at the time, we did what we did because it was the right thing to do.

"When we made that move, we were in a completely different position, a completely different situation," Grunfeld said. "I think at that time, it was the absolutely right thing to do, to be a very competitive ball club. And everybody thought we were. We felt like we needed some veterans at certain positions to complement what we had. Certain things happened that were out of our hands that were unforeseen, as far as injuries and chemistry issues and of course, the incident in the locker room. Those are things we couldn't have planned for."

He then added, "Our plans have to change."

The Wizards have been able to regroup and begin the rebuilding process by landing the top overall pick in John Wall last June, but there will always be some amount of suspense and mystery surrounding Rubio until he finally comes to the NBA.

Rubio delayed his arrival last season, and instead went on to help his Spanish club, FC Barcelona, win the Euroleague title. Rubio is still 19 -- more than a month younger than Wall -- so it's still kind of early to call him a flop based on his performance in the world championships (Just as there is no need to go overboard with praising Yi Jianlian's performance for China, although there were some encouraging signs). He remains a feisty competitor with a suspect jumper but could still become a solid NBA player if he comes over by 2012, as expected. It just may be time to temper some of the hype.

It's way to early to make a fair assessment of the deal for Booker and Ndiaye, since none of parties involved has played an NBA yet. Little was made about the trade last summer, since it involved late, low-profile draft picks. Plus, the Wizards were able to move up to get the player they coveted in Booker, an undersized and rugged player meant to embody a new, defensive mindset for the team. The Wizards are also in no rush to bring along Ndiaye.

But Booker will have at least two years to have an influence on the Wizards before Bjelica comes to the league. Until then, Wizards fans can keep tabs on the Bjelica on Saturday against host Turkey and worry about whether the team missed out on something special in a few years.

By Michael Lee  |  September 8, 2010; 10:01 PM ET
Categories:  Trevor Booker  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Wizards announce television schedule
Next: Wizards season schedule breakdown: Part VI

Comments

Ernie isn't good drafting he clearly doesn't
put forth the same effort as he does with
trades

Posted by: grayterrence | September 9, 2010 1:13 AM | Report abuse

As we watch Stephan Curry play for the U.S. team at the world championships, remember these now infamous words from Ernie Grunfeld.
............................................................
Grunfeld said. "I don't think there are any guarantees in the draft and people are saying this is a weaker draft than normal, so for us to be able to turn the No. 5 pick into two players who can help us immediately and help us for years to come, we felt very good about it."

Grunfeld added that it wasn't necessary to wait and see which player fell to the team at No. 5. "We knew who was going to be at the five spot and we felt that these players were going to help us a lot more than anybody we would've gotten in the
draft,"
......................................................
LOL!!! "Players that could help us for years to come" Miller & Foye, Wizards 4-Life..Oh-wait.

Posted by: closg | September 9, 2010 5:59 AM | Report abuse

That's why ernie should get canned. If he honestly thinks it was right at the time, he needs to get canned. I can understand a coach making that deal, but a GM is supposed to have his eyes on the here and now and tomorrow, and that deal was never going to do more than make us a slightly more mediocre team than what we would have been without it IF EVERYTHING HAD GONE RIGHT. If that's the upside of the deal, you do not make it. How he could think the roster was fine and we couldn't use an infusion of talent from the likes of Curry or Jennings or hell even risking it on Rubio is totally beyond me. Absolute foolishness.

He needs to get fired. You don't trade top 5 picks for two bench players EVER. We got swindled.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | September 9, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

brandon jennings is neither here nor there imho, dont really care that we didnt draft him. Curry looks like the goods, but with the addition of Wall it's pretty hard to be upset with our backcourt.

and at the time, it seemed more people were upset EG passed on the fraudulent Rubio than Curry so there's plenty of hindsight 20/20 in some of the criticism.

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

It's a good question, if entirely speculative: all other things being equal, would the Wiz be a much better club today if they'd kept the #5 pick that season and added one of the likely candidates?

RUBIO: this is who most thought they would end up with at 5. Doesn't look now like they would have signed him, either; Europe was a better deal at that point. He wouldn't be a factor this season, or perhaps next.

JORDAN HILL: The Wiz needed a young big man & this was the favorite. Went to NY, struggled, and was shipped to Houston. He might have played in Washington just based on present need. But he hasn't impressed anybody.

DEJUAN BLAIR: he's turned out well but nobody pretends the Wiz or any other club would have taken him at 5. Too big a gamble. He went 37th.

BRANDON JENNINGS: a big surprise to most clubs (including Milwaukee) in terms of early success. He'd definitely have played a lot in Washington. Obvious flaws are defense and a low FG % (37%). Don't know how he'd mix with Wall -- good on offense, not so good on defense, would be my guess.

STEPHEN CURRY: he's the one many fanz would have picked over Rubio. A great shooter with obvious deficiencies in other areas. Of the group, the best pairing with Wall and Arenas.

So the answer is, yep, they should have kept the pick and selected either Curry or Jennings. If they'd picked Rubio or Hill, we'd be hearing as much criticism as we do now.

Of course, firing a GM because he didn't pick the right player is kind of stupid. All GMs miss on players. His replacement will, too. It's more about whether the owner is happy with the direction the team is going. If the owner thinks they're getting better, he should probably stay the course. If he doesn't, make a change, regardless of how well a particular draft choice turned out.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Closg, I thought the comment that Mike repeated by EG reflected badly, but then when you bring out the ones you've highlighted, it is like, Wow!

Yeah, hindsight is 20-20 and also be very telling. I have never wanted to come to a final conclusion about Ernie. Instead, I have mostly wanted to give him the benifit of the doubt and wait and see.

One would have to know that the deal he made last year could never be looked at beforehand as being the best or the worse that he could have made.

The draft is taking a chance, like making a bet, and you hope it pans out for you. For Ernie to be of the opinion today that he still made the best deal after all that has past, (20-20), says a lot about his mindset.

To me, after evaluating all that happened, it would be realistic and reasonable for Ernie to say something today like, "At the time I felt is was the best deal for the Team, but as I look at all that has happened now, before and after the locker room incident, a different decision might have given us a different path.

You have to believe that decisions you make in life guide your path and can lead you to one result or another. And this is also true when the decisions you make can affect others and organizations because you just happen to be a GM of a NBA team.

For Ernie to still believe that he made the best decision then, it indicates that he is on the side of folks that believe everything is already predetermined and our own thoughts and decisions matters less.

On the other hand, there is the thinking that people can make their own way in life and all things are possible as in a NBA championship.

Now, we must know that Ernie Grunfield has to be of the latter, but the statements he has made fall on the side of the former.

If Ernie still believes now that he made the best decision, considering hindsight, then I question whether he should be leading a team as a GM.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

All of the unforeseen failings last year netted us John Wall, the mosy dynamic player in the draft. Things must get worse before they get better. I'd take Wall over curry, jennings, rubio (that guy will get killed by NBA players on a daily basis, laughable) etc. Trading away the fifth pick, having that awful season of losing, chemistry issues, and Gil, also allowed us to dump caron, brendan, deshawn, antawn, etc and start over because we all knew, years ago, that this makeup wasn't going to win us a conference championship. If we drafted jennings or rubio or curry, whose to say none of that crap would or would not of happened.

Sure EG made some bad picks (Pech, Nick Young MAYBE NOT, JCN) but he made some really good ones as well (Javale, Andray, Booker, Wall DUH, DMac I LOVED THAT GUY). Every GM hits and misses. Having a owner with a win later mentality helps the direction as well. We were complacent, but ABE wanted one more shot every year. Him and Snyder were alot alike from a ownership standpoint. Times have changed and we will be good, if not great, in a matter of time. GO WIZARDS!!!

Posted by: BurgwithaU | September 9, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

and at the time, it seemed more people were upset EG passed on the fraudulent Rubio than Curry so there's plenty of hindsight 20/20 in some of the criticism.

Posted by: divi3
Maybe, but I,like I believe the above poster was upset with assuming the team does not need bring in young talent to challenge or at least be up incoming roatation players. A team that was barely above .500 at its best. That was either lazy or bending the truth to cover up an unfortunate financial decision.I also believe that he puts miniimal o the draft. But we all know that it is unaceptable to critisize or judge Ernie on any aspect of the job.(not you Divi)

Posted by: millineumman | September 9, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Forgot to mention Juan Carlos Navarro, the Spanish leading scorer (shooting 48%), whom Wizards drafted years ago, and traded to get Jarvis Critten.

Posted by: sagaliba | September 9, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

And Samson151, lets ask ourselves, what if we had a kept the pick and drafted Curry or Jennings?

Would either the two of them helped Gilbert run the team? It's possible.

Would it have made a broken foot guy even less of factor in the goinsons' of the team and possibly he might not have been one of the partakers in that fateful Mile High Club card game.

In fact, with the influence of a guy like Curry, the Mile High Club might have been a different atmosphere altogether.

I know, I pontificate a bit much, but one can never underestimate the influence of one person in a room or an organization.

Gilbert has had great influence on these cast of characters now gone, but what influence would a guy like Stephen Curry have bought to the game.

Certainly, Mike Miller and Randy Foye did not bring much influence to the game. You know, time tells us now that these two guys probably wasn't the type of character guys you want from a Number Five Pick.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I was never a fan of the 2009 draft trade. However, after the season started I came to like Foye's game and believe the Wizards should have retained him. This is where I fault EG. Mike says in his story that "when it appeared that the Wizards would likely lose both Miller and Foye in free agency." The Wizards didn't lose Foye in free agency, they renounced his rights and let him walk.

Foye played well in the beginning of the season and got hurt and when he came back Flip had fallen in love with Earl and Foye couldn't get regular minutes. Yes, he started for while after the trades, but by that time his game was screwed up by Flip jerking him around from December to February.

We all knew Miller was a possible rental for one year (that was the price for getting rid of Ethan). Foye was the person who at the end of the day was your 5th pick in the 2009 draft. I believe EG should be fired right now for not having the foresight to see that Foye might not be with this team only after one season or for not having the balls to stand up to the coach (who he hired) saying that we're going to keep this guy and you're going to find a way to fit him into your game plan.

Looking at that trade brings into question the other two trades during the 2010 draft. I ask again, why would you trade for a 29 year old back point guard making $17 million over two years, when you could have kept Foye paying him around $4 million which is what most back ups point guards are making. I'm ramble, EG has done some good things like going out and getting Gil and drafting McGee, but his drafting and draft/trades over these last two years brings into question how well he's doing his job.

Posted by: 33dgriffin | September 9, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

All of the unforeseen failings last year netted us John Wall, the mosy dynamic player in the draft. Things must get worse before they get better. I'd take Wall over curry, jennings, rubio (that guy will get killed by NBA players on a daily basis, laughable) etc. Trading away the fifth pick, having that awful season of losing, chemistry issues, and Gil, also allowed us to dump caron, brendan, deshawn, antawn, etc and start over because we all knew, years ago, that this makeup wasn't going to win us a conference championship. If we drafted jennings or rubio or curry, whose to say none of that crap would or would not of happened.

... Times have changed and we will be good, if not great, in a matter of time. GO WIZARDS!!!

Posted by: BurgwithaU | September 9, 2010 10:04 AM

This is so true. It is what is called, falling in horse manure and coming out smelling like a rose. Or, as some would say a Blessing in Disguise.

For yes, even with the disappointment to the start of the season last year, it was Gilbert Arena's fateful actions that is undoubtedly the catalyst for where this team is right now.

I wonder if the Gilbert Haters are choking on a mouthful of fate. Swallow easy boys.

LOL!

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Grunfeld has done a terrible job as the Wizards GM.

Trading away Bjelica will be seen as a huge mistake later on.

Posted by: john24 | September 9, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Grunfeld has done a terrible job as the Wizards GM, and makes Wes Unseld look like a genius.

Trading away Bjelica will be seen as a huge mistake later on.

Posted by: john24 | September 9, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

The way I see it is Jennings or curry would have probably put us at around 36 wins and out of the playoffs after the Gilbert guns incident. We would not have gotten john wall and we would still be carrying deadweight pech and thomas. The trade got us John Wall and CAP SPACE for the new collective bargaining agreement. Think about this Arenas, Stevenson, butler, Jamison, Haywood with Curry off the bench or wall, arenas, howard, blatch, mcGee with Cap space. The results would be the same for the present but in the future theres potential with our current group

Posted by: jefferu | September 9, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Samson151, don't forget.... we could have drafted Blair in the 2nd round. Problem is, we sold the pick for cash instead. The cash was used to sign Oberto. Grunfeld gets an 'F' from me. He should have gotten the big 'F' from Leonsis!

Posted by: eyekey416 | September 9, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

The biggest problem with Grundfeld is he has no concept on building a TEAM versus noticing talent. what's the point of having 3 all star caliber players that don't fit? As a fan i knew the big 3 would never win it all and Ernie had to know the same. Ernie is milking this job and the organization.

And let's not forget the Pollin influence too. so the WIZ were blindly loyalty on one side and frugal on the other. Pay my latest Wes Unseld too much (jamison), then pass on known talent for cash payments. San Antonio, who plays to win, jumped on the opportunity.

Posted by: oknow1 | September 9, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

"I believe EG should be fired right now for not having the foresight to see that Foye might not be with this team only after one season or for not having the balls to stand up to the coach (who he hired) saying that we're going to keep this guy and you're going to find a way to fit him into your game plan." Posted by: 33dgriffin

I guess the likely explanation is that EG (and presumably Saunders) felt that Hinrich is better than Foye. Even with the dollar disparity.

I see Randy is now with the Clips, where he'll play behind Baron Davis and Eric Gordon. LA also has swingman Rasual Butler, SG Mardy Collins, and rookies Eric Bledsoe and Willie Warren looking for playing time. Looks on the surface like they're hoping Randy can back up both guard positions, the way Grunfeld hoped he could here.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Divi,

For me, what was missed is only half the point, what is fundamentally unjustifiable is the philosophy behind the move. How do you justify moving a top 5 draft pick for bench players? If you can justify the move philosophically than fine, i can deal with missing out on some good kids, but moving a top 5 pick for reserves for a team that isn't gonna sniff the conference finals, let alone a title? There is no justifying that sort of thing ever, not in my book, a move like that only makes sense for a team that is a genuine contender, we were not.

It's inexplicable and beyond stupid. One could see the interest if not in my case the value of trading a top pick for Antawn more than half a decade ago, Antawn was a veteran with good work habits, and a nice piece to put the kids around, Mike Miller and Randy Foye were not Antawn and would never be Antawn, they were specialists and reserves w/limited upsides and contracts that would likely be shed after a year.

Moving a top pick for that, even in a shallow draft was the idiotic move, a GM desperate to win now would make, instead of the architect of a sound plan, and as a result, not surprisingly, the move had all the wisdom and staying power of a 5 year olds plans to build a house of playing cards while watching scooby-doo at the same time.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | September 9, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"Samson151, don't forget.... we could have drafted Blair in the 2nd round. Problem is, we sold the pick for cash instead."Posted by: eyekey416

Haven't forgotten. But don't you forget those other 36 times DeJuan was passed on before San Antonio took him in the draft. He was a high medical risk then, & he's still a medical risk.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"How do you justify moving a top 5 draft pick for bench players? posted by graywolf81"

He didn't see them as bench players. Most NBA coaches and GMs think in terms of a rotation of 7-8 players who are supposed to complement one another and includes 2 or 3 who are very adept at coming off the bench. You wouldn't want your top eight to be composed entirely of guys who felt they had to start to be comfortable. You need players who can contribute as needed and don't require a set number of minutes to be effective.

That's what EG hoped Foye and Miller would be. It's probably the role they have in mind for Foye in LA, behind Davis and Eric Gordon. Miller could well start in Miami or come off the bench. He's done both effectively, just not here in DC.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"Moving a top pick for that, even in a shallow draft was the idiotic move, a GM desperate to win now would make, instead of the architect of a sound plan, and as a result, not surprisingly, the move had all the wisdom and staying power of a 5 year olds plans to build a house of playing cards while watching scooby-doo at the same time.
Posted by: graywolfe81"

LOL I give that points for metaphor, but not for accuracy. It's a mistake to airily dismiss the context in which the decision was made. EG and the team (along with most of the NBA) felt the Wiz were ready to make a move in the playoffs. It was also widely believed that Washington's window on such a run was rapidly closing. In that situation, most GMs will pick a veteran over a rookie every time. And it was clear that EG didn't place much value on that 5th pick, the way he might have on one of the top three. As he said, it was regarded as a weak draft class. Turned out better than projected (so far), but we need another season to evaluate it. You know about sophomore slumps.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

I'm really glad we ended up with the pick that got John Wall.

I have not agreed with EG's philosophy with the entire draft and scouting process but I hope that can be something that improves from here on out.

Who knows what criteria or time frame Teddy L. will use to determine EG's continued tenure here but maybe there will be no more confusing salry/luxury tax vs. building a team issues.

Posted by: millineumman | September 9, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I like the roster we have. So although that trade ended up being a stinker, and I believe that EG way overestimated the capabilities of both Miller and Foye....it's spilled milk now and our future is bright so it's allgood


Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Samson they may have felt that way, but they were four years removed from even winning a playoff series, their triumvirate of stars was older, not better, and also getting more and more dinged each year. If they thought they were ready to make a playoff move, they were totally deluded. To another poster, I understand that Foye and Miller were viewed as significantly better than say a Nick Young option on the bench, or a DMac, or our lil point guard that could last year, but even so, they weren't difference makers. I grant that the draft may have been perceived as sort of '00/'01 redux, where the top of the blue chip section was riddled w/questionable prospects instead of say, a top heavy cream based top of the draft like 2003. However, a top 5 pick, in the end, is an asset that shouldn't be used for getting guys like Miller and Foye unless they are final piece caliber players. They were anything but. We were nothing remotely like LA, or Phoenix, or San Antonio, or Boston or Orlando, let alone Cleveland, or Portland and the like. We weren't going to be sniffing much of anything in terms of a huge season.

If that's so, and I firmly believe it is, than you cannot make that trade. You use that asset in a package for a young guy with upside, a genuine difference maker, or you sit tight, and take the best guy on the board, probably Curry, if Rubio wasn't considered (i'd love for us to have targetting Jennings but that wasn't going to happen). Instead, we got litterally nothing of note in exchange for a pick that would have likely netted us our starting 2 guard for the next decade. A real shame.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | September 9, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

^^^
Well-said graywolfe81, no-other team traded their lottery pick in 2009.

As head of our talent evaluation, the fact that Ernie Grunfeld could not see that Stephen Curry was better than Randy Foye & Nick Young and had limitless potential shows that he should not be trusted with selecting our players, not to mention selling our 2nd rounder. It is stunning that this man is still a GM.

Posted by: closg | September 9, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

I guess the likely explanation is that EG (and presumably Saunders) felt that Hinrich is better than Foye. Even with the dollar disparity.

I see Randy is now with the Clips, where he'll play behind Baron Davis and Eric Gordon. LA also has swingman Rasual Butler, SG Mardy Collins, and rookies Eric Bledsoe and Willie Warren looking for playing time. Looks on the surface like they're hoping Randy can back up both guard positions, the way Grunfeld hoped he could here.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Samson151, the question is - is Hinrich $14 million better than Foye. I say no. Also, is Hinrich worth not having nothing to show for 2009 5th pick. Again I say no.

Yes, I know we got the 17 pick with the Kirk trade, but I don't like who they picked. Maybe KS will surprise me like McGee. If he doesn't EG will have blow Cap space, the 2009 pick and another draft pick.

Posted by: 33dgriffin | September 9, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Aye, Aye, graywolfe81.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

And yes it is grand that circumstances dealt us the #1 pick and JW, but what sticks in my craw about all the other picks in the draft this year is that;

It seems that Ernie was reaching out with his selections to prove that he was shrewd and had to prove that the obvious picks wasn't a good way to go.

For instance, at the center position, there were still obvious legit seven foot centers available which is a dire need to go along with McGee but we end up with hybrids, whom are projected to play PF, which is Blatche's position. I don't get that.

Besides the sure pick of John Wall, which was a no brainer, all the other selections are questionable.

Why?

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

"For instance, at the center position, there were still obvious legit seven foot centers available which is a dire need to go along with McGee but we end up with hybrids, whom are projected to play PF, which is Blatche's position. I don't get that."

Just because a guy is 7 feet tall doesn't automatically make him legit or a C.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

"Certainly, Mike Miller and Randy Foye did not bring much influence to the game. You know, time tells us now that these two guys probably wasn't the type of character guys you want from a Number Five Pick."

Really? Please explain, in detail, what either of them have done, before or since joining the Wizards, that calls their character into question.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

"If they thought they were ready to make a playoff move, they were totally deluded. "

That's true. But it doesn't change the fact that said delusion is quite clearly what fueled the decision to trade the pick. By your own admission, trading the pick only makes sense if it's for players they thought could help push the team over the top. Well, that's what they thought they were doing.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

EG was dead wrong about how good the team was, and to a lesser extent, what Miller and Foyer brought to the table. Which is why he deserves whatever heat he gets for that trade.

And it makes no difference if ESPN the Magazine thought the Wizards were good or if Kevin Mchale picked them to be in the EasternConf Finals, the team stunk and it reflects poorly on the people in charge not to have realized it

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Whatever draft pick grunfeld would have made or whatever trade with that pick would it matter? Think about it how would the presence of absence of ricky rubio, jennings, curry, mike miller, foye, pech, thomas, songaila actually prevented Arenas from bringing in his toys to work. (Unless they traded Crittenten)

Posted by: jefferu | September 9, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

That's true. But it doesn't change the fact that said delusion is quite clearly what fueled the decision to trade the pick. By your own admission, trading the pick only makes sense if it's for players they thought could help push the team over the top. Well, that's what they thought they were doing.

Posted by: kalo_rama

And that decision is being critisized. The same way that Mcgee gets critisized. Or Blatche, or Gil, or Nick Young.

Posted by: millineumman | September 9, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Do all of the people moaning about the trade prefer Curry or Rubio to Wall? Because, according to line of thought being put forth, those guys would have certainly made the Wizards a better team. However, being a better team would have hurt their chances to draft Wall. So other than leaping onto another opportunity to criticize Grunfeld (who isn't going anywhere any time soon) what's the point? Can't have it both ways.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

"And that decision is being critisized."

Except there's no point to criticizing that decision because it's a done deal. Nothing about it can be changed or altered going forward. And since it lead (however indirectly) to helping the team land Wall, no one should want anything about it to change. That is not the same thing as criticizing a player for failing to improve or live up to his potential because that is something that can and should change and does have future implications.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I still think Seraphin was picked to play Center and not PF. By all accounts (outside of bloggers here) he has virtually no offensive game which must have been obvious to EG when he decided to move up for him. Rugged, undersized, defensive minded C who can handle players taller then himself due to his size, length, and athleticism...BenWallace2.0

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Most of the draft reports I've seen on Seraphin have described his offensive game along the lines of raw and in need of work, but improving and with potential (and the clips of his play bear that out). I haven't seen anything to suggest that he has no hope of developing an offensive game (which is clearly what a comparison to Ben Wallace implies).

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Kalo,
Mike Lee's post brought up the issues of the last two drafts decisions. I also acknowledged it's in the past I and just want for those kinds of processes to improve for the Wiz but truthfully it was luck that got us mostly luck or fortune that got us the #1 pick this year, not skill or dillegence. If EG will be the one continuing to make roster decisions he will have to improve unless we are going to blessed with that kind of luck every year.

Posted by: millineumman | September 9, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"Certainly, Mike Miller and Randy Foye did not bring much influence to the game. You know, time tells us now that these two guys probably wasn't the type of character guys you want from a Number Five Pick."

Really? Please explain, in detail, what either of them have done, before or since joining the Wizards, that calls their character into question.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:37 PM

Not indicating that they had bad character at all. The indication is that their character did not have an influence on the team. They did not, as it appears exhibit those traits of leadership that affect others or influence others to respond and act differently because of them.

A number five pick in the draft you would hope is the type of pick that will have impact and influence on your team.

It appears now, that Miller and Foye did not measure up IMO to that criteria. I think that it is a valid evaluation of their tenure here as it relates to the #5 overall pick in last years draft.

What value did they really have on the team as a #5 selection. It appears as of now, none, as in nothing.

When we look back and evaluate top picks in a draft, it now appears that our #5 pick last year was a dud.

Thats what I mean by them not adding influence or bringing character to the team.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"Not indicating that they had bad character at all. The indication is that their character did not have an influence on the team. They did not, as it appears exhibit those traits of leadership that affect others or influence others to respond and act differently because of them.

That's a load of crap. Miller and Foye weren't brought to this team to provide "leadership" and any suggestion that they were is utter nonsense. Their "character" was a nonissue in every way, shape, and form.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"For instance, at the center position, there were still obvious legit seven foot centers available which is a dire need to go along with McGee but we end up with hybrids, whom are projected to play PF, which is Blatche's position. I don't get that."

Just because a guy is 7 feet tall doesn't automatically make him legit or a C.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:34 PM

Left to Ernie, I guess we will never know will we. But obviously, we do know that he drafted players that we already know aren't legit centers and projected to play power forward.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

"But obviously, we do know that he drafted players that we already know aren't legit centers and projected to play power forward."

How do we know that? Seraphin hasn't played a nanosecond of NBA ball yet, so perhaps it's a bit too soon to say definitively what is or isn't or can or can't do. Because the history of the NBA (ever relatively recent history) shows several players under 7 feet tall who have successfully manned the C spot.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

nba draft.net:

"Touch on his [seraphin]shot is just average … Offensive repertoire consists of put backs and shots in close to the basket … His ability to develop a legitimate post game and become an offensive weapon is still a question mark … A 55% free throw shooter … Averaged 52% from the floor, too low for a player taking most of his shots close to the basket … Lacks much versatility: face the basket, ball handling, vision and passing are all extremely raw/limited"

Most of the scouting is fairly similar and that assessment is of a guy light years away from having the type of offensive game needed to be a quality nba PF. I see him as a Center, we'll see.

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

make that:

. . . (even relatively recent history) . . .

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Not indicating that they had bad character at all. The indication is that their character did not have an influence on the team. They did not, as it appears exhibit those traits of leadership that affect others or influence others to respond and act differently because of them.

That's a load of crap. Miller and Foye weren't brought to this team to provide "leadership" and any suggestion that they were is utter nonsense. Their "character" was a nonissue in every way, shape, and form.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:18 PM

If that is true and their leadership was not a consideration, then maybe we should not a used a #5 selection for them. Maybe a much later 1st rounder or even better a 2nd round pick.

For in my book, at the number five selection, leadership and character influence should be a high consideration, donchathink???

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

(not have used a #5)

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | September 9, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

I love how you post one quote that supports your opinion then blithely submit that all of the rest say the same thing.

Moreover, I never disputed that he would/could play C in the NBA so this little ditty "that assessment is of a guy light years away from having the type of offensive game needed to be a quality nba PF" is irrelevant. You said he had "virtually no offensive game" and compared him to Ben Wallace, one of the worst offensive starting big men in the NBA. There's nothing in any of the evaluation that puts anything close to that stamp on Seraphin, regardless of which position he plays. There's a long way from limited to nonexistent.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

"For in my book, at the number five selection, leadership and character influence should be a high consideration, donchathink???"

Character is a consideration at every pick and position, but it always comes in a distant second to whether a guy can play. The idea that teams base their decisions on top 5 picks primarily on character and that character is what separates guys at the top of the lottery from guys in the second round is, of course, horse manure.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

(Let's try this again:)

I love how you post one quote that supports your opinion then blithely submit that all of the rest say the same thing.

Moreover, I never disputed that he would/could play C in the NBA so this little ditty "that assessment is of a guy light years away from having the type of offensive game needed to be a quality nba PF" is irrelevant. You said he had "virtually no offensive game" and compared him to Ben Wallace, one of the worst offensive starting big men in the history of the NBA. There's nothing in any of the evaluation that puts anything close to that stamp on Seraphin, regardless of which position he plays. There's a long way from limited to nonexistent.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I said he has virtually no offensive game then posted a draft report backing the statement up.

how about you post some of the scouting reports you've read that peg him as having the offensive makeup to be an nba PF? Everything I read is defensive minded C, would be interested in seeing the stuff that projects him differently.

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

"As head of our talent evaluation, the fact that Ernie Grunfeld could not see that Stephen Curry was better than Randy Foye & Nick Young and had limitless potential shows that he should not be trusted with selecting our players, not to mention selling our 2nd rounder." posted by: closg

More hyperbole. Stephen Curry doesn't have 'limitless' potential. He's a shooter. He's on the FIBA team because he's a shooter and they don't have many shooters.

He's not anywhere near as proficient as a ball-handler, distributor, or defender.

He's not John Wall or Derrick Rose, or even Russell Westbrook. He's a nice player with a truly outstanding shot, who can get his shot off in most situations. He would have made an excellent complement to John Wall, as I noted. Not so excellent to Gilbert Arenas.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

"As head of our talent evaluation, the fact that Ernie Grunfeld could not see that Stephen Curry was better than Randy Foye & Nick Young and had limitless potential shows that he should not be trusted with selecting our players, not to mention selling our 2nd rounder." posted by: closg

More hyperbole. Stephen Curry doesn't have 'limitless' potential. He's a shooter. He's on the FIBA team because he's a shooter and they don't have many shooters.

He's not anywhere near as proficient as a ball-handler, distributor, or defender.

He's not John Wall or Derrick Rose, or even Russell Westbrook. He's a nice player with a truly outstanding shot, who can get his shot off in most situations. He would have made an excellent complement to John Wall, as I noted. Not so excellent to Gilbert Arenas.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

how about you post some of the scouting reports you've read that peg him as having the offensive makeup to be an nba PF?"

There you go again, dancing with the straw.

A) I never said he would specifically play PF (in fact, I said specifically, in response to LICM, that it's too soon to slot him into the PF position without actually seeing him play against NBA competition). So, again, irrelevant. (B) I already offered that all of the reports I've seen said his offensive game was currently limited and raw. What they did not say, however, is that he lacked any hope of improving on them, which is exactly what you're saying, by comparing him to Ben Wallace and saying he has no offensive game at all (which, based on the limited visual evidence we've seen of his overseas play, does not appear to be true).

"Everything I read is defensive minded C, would be interested in seeing the stuff that projects him differently."

More likely, that's simply how you interpreted everything you read because it fits your preconceived notion.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

He has a chiseled 6'9, 260lb body and uses it effectively. Seraphin pins his defender down low uses an array of moves to score including spins to the basket, jump hooks with either hand, and short fadeaway jumpers. However, Seraphin will need to add more counter moves and further extend his jumper out to 15 feet. He does have great footwork down low and at least shows the desire to add a jumper.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bulls-confidential/2010/06/kevin-seraphin-2010-draft-profile.html




Offensively, Seraphin remains a raw prospect by NBA standards. He does a good job using his body to carve out space in the post (where he can finish above the rim in impressive fashion thanks to his tremendous length), but he is still lacking in terms of advanced footwork and post moves. He looks a bit limited at times when double teams arrive and he’s forced to improvise or make quick decisions.

Seraphin has good hands and is a terrific target for lobs and pick-and-roll finishes, but he’s not the type of player you want making plays with the ball at this point in his career. Improving his repertoire of spin moves, pivots and countermoves in the post will go a long way -- as will gaining experience and improving his all-around feel for the game.

With that said, Seraphin shows interesting potential with his jump hook. He’s able to get it off smoothly and convert it with either hand. He also appears to have a soft touch around the basket, particularly with a good-looking turnaround jump shot that he executes with a high release point.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kevin-Seraphin-5278/


That, to me (coupled with what we've seen in clips and footage) says raw and limited but with potential for development. A far cry from "virtually no offensive game" or "Ben Wallace v 2.0.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I said KS has little to no offensive game which you (in typical fashion) twisted into 'lacked any hope of improving' so you could make your "point" by changing the subject. Has there ever been a scouting report for a 20yr old 1st round pick that says "lacks any hope of improving"??

again, just post/link some scouting reports that see him as a PF (i'm sure there are some). IMO, a guy who cant score more than 6pts/night in a 2nd tier euro-league isnt drafted 17th with the intent of being a PF

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

"I said KS has little to no offensive game which you (in typical fashion) twisted into 'lacked any hope of improving' so you could make your "point" by changing the subject. Has there ever been a scouting report for a 20yr old 1st round pick that says "lacks any hope of improving"??"

You also said he was "Ben Wallace 2.0." Ben Wallace, a 14 year vet with a career scoring average of 6 ppg who can't hit a 2 foot unguarded jumpshot. If your "point" wasn't to liken him to Wallace, a guy who never developed even a hint of offense but thrived as a "defensive ninded C" (to quote you) you shouldn't have compared the two.

"again, just post/link some scouting reports that see him as a PF"

You keep saying that, like it has anything whatsoever to do with my point. It doesn't. I never said he was a PF so it continues to have no relevance. In fact, I quite clearly indicated he could possibly be a C. Moreover, the idea that there's some hard and fast rule that says all PFs are top tier scorers and all Cs are bulky bangers with no offense is nonsense.

"again, just post/link some scouting reports that see him as a PF (i'm sure there are some). IMO, a guy who cant score more than 6pts/night in a 2nd tier euro-league isnt drafted 17th with the intent of being a PF"

Oh, so now you can tell what position a guy plays based on where he's drafted? How does that work exactly?

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

really odd you cant just post some of the scouting reports you claim to have read.

Posted by: divi3 | September 9, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Not as odd as your fanatical commitment to "responding" to things without actually bothering to read what you claim to be responding to.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

I was thinking that Ben Wallace is a good example of what happens to defensive players in the NBA. Ben won defensive MVP four times in five years -- and that's playing center while generously listed at 6'9" (he's closer to 6'7"). Yet how often did you hear Wallace mentioned with the group of NBA superstars of the time? I'm guessing never.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

One statistic that is impressive about Ricky Rubio is his assist to turnover ratio. He also does well in getting steals. When he does begin play for the Wolves, he will be the average age of college draftees only he has played professionally since age 14.

Bjelica has a huge upside. He previously played on low level teams but he is fundamentally sound. He did make a few mistakes though versus Spain.

Posted by: Captain_Universe | September 9, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

With Rubio the issue isn't hype so much as overscrutiny. He's still the best PG prospect in that draft, and deserved to be taken in the top 5. Nobody knows how good he'll be in the NBA, but he already looks better than Calderon, so I'd say the future looks pretty bright as long as he doesn't become complacent in Europe.

And let's not get carried away about Bjelica. Spain's defense was atrocious, and he fouled out in 14 minutes.

Posted by: djnnnou | September 9, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

"Touch on his [seraphin]shot is just average … Offensive repertoire consists of put backs and shots in close to the basket … His ability to develop a legitimate post game and become an offensive weapon is still a question mark … A 55% free throw shooter … Averaged 52% from the floor, too low for a player taking most of his shots close to the basket … Lacks much versatility: face the basket, ball handling, vision and passing are all extremely raw/limited"

I feel like you could substitute McGee for Seraphin in that description and it would still be just about spot on. He seems like basically a bigger, more physical JaVale.

again, just post/link some scouting reports that see him as a PF (i'm sure there are some). IMO, a guy who cant score more than 6pts/night in a 2nd tier euro-league isnt drafted 17th with the intent of being a PF

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/players/overview/1751164

Euro stats mean nothing. Brandon Jennings? 6pts. in 15 minutes per game. Everyone knows young players don't get much clock in Europe. Serge Ibaka?

Didn't the nbadraft.net article YOU posted have him projected as a PF? Everywhere I looked has him as a PF/C. He's able to play both.

Hulking bigman who has added a great deal of muscle in the past year and a half … Shows nice potential due to his combination of strength and athleticism … Explosive post player with ideal strength and toughness to play inside … Very aggressive around the rim, known for making ferocious dunks … Big, soft hands allow him to grab boards with ease … Strong rebounder with a willingness to bang inside … Huge frame with wide shoulders and thick legs. Not many players with his girth have the type of athleticism he possesses … Has shown some development in his offensive game adding a turn around hook shot and better feel in the post … Still has a ways to go but his development in the past year gives him some offensive hope … Does a solid job of playing “within” himself. Knows his role as an interior force and doesn’t attempt to face the basket or play outside his comfort zone …

(nbadraft.net)

Posted by: SDMDTSU | September 9, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

"He seems like basically a bigger, more physical JaVale."

Shorter and thicker is more like it. Supposedly weighed around 260 coming into this draft and picked up some weight during recent inactivity.

He's a little short to match up against 7 footers but I imagine after a while he'll be fine against the 6'10" guys who man the center position for most teams. Might even match up pretty well with Dwight Howard. The main thing is to get him healthy. Until we see how far he has to go to get in shape, we're shooting in the dark.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I've only see Bjelica play twice, both times in this tournament, and the problem IMO is defense. He's a skill SF who's just not quick enough to match up with NBA SFs. You can't put him over at PF, strengthwise. He actually fits well at guard, but the matchups there are even more unfair.

Toni Kukoc without the jump shot? But a lot of Kukoc's success was based on the threat of the long three-pointer. Bjelica shoots under 30% from out there.

I'm thinking a reserve.

Posted by: Samson151 | September 9, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

I meant bigger size wise. I feel what you're saying though.
Javale came in at like 235-240. Seraphin is at least 260. I don't think it's a debate strength wise. I don't think the 3-4 inches is going to be as much of an issue as someone being 7'0" without the strength. I think he'll do a better job holding position in the post that anyone else we have at least.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | September 9, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

So according to some, since we landed John Wall, we should give Ernie a pass for trading the #5 last year.

Wow, what logic. I wish dumb blind luck could cover up my incompetence and allow me to keep my own job!

Posted by: Dat2U | September 10, 2010 12:34 AM | Report abuse

My problem about 2009 draft exchange was not the action, it is the reasning given by EG.I wonder if he realy was convinced that MM and AF would be the right picks to win as Ray allen was to boston.If it is the real reason,i will remain in pain until EG fired but knowing the old owner i think it was a reflex arch type of move just to cut coast.The team was not in a position to keep the 5th pick and stay under the salary cup.I am very poor in history, do you remember any NBA team trading a high pick just to be in the NBA range of salary cup? if it is a kind of common, then it is fine ,if it is rare again EG should not remain on the wagen, he need to go.He also signed Stevenson and forced to trade carlos.Carlos would have been the right man to help us win more when Arenas was down.

Posted by: gtefferra | September 10, 2010 6:20 AM | Report abuse

"

"If they thought they were ready to make a playoff move, they were totally deluded. "

That's true. But it doesn't change the fact that said delusion is quite clearly what fueled the decision to trade the pick. By your own admission, trading the pick only makes sense if it's for players they thought could help push the team over the top. Well, that's what they thought they were doing."

And that's my point, Kalo, if Gruden thought that then, or if Gruden still can justify that thought now, he needs to be fired immediately so he can't deliberately frag the team with his own incompetence during the rebuild. Ten years or so ago Leonsis faced the same situation. Should he clean house or not when he bought the caps? GMGM had made some bad picks, had some horrible drafts ('98-'01 were absolutely horrific), and the team was sort of in limbo. Do you keep that around? In the end it appears Leonsis decided to trust that GMGM's problems were related to the underfunding of the team under Pollin, the scouting department was horrible, the big club was older, not better, and changes needed to be made, but no funding was provided or support to make it happen, so they committed to that rebuild. We're still waiting for GMGM to do much beyond round 1 of the draft, and stealing opponents blind in trades, but there is no denying that in the space of 5 years, a bottom of the league organization in terms of its farm system and direction, radically changed and hit a top 3-5 rating in the league between '06-'10 save for one year (i believe '09 when a lot of prospects had made the jump, with back to back quality drafts, we've again jumpted into the top 6 or so).

Leonsis has to now make the same decision about this team under Grunfeld, if Grunfeld believes what was done in '09 was philosophyically sound, than he has to be fired for one, having unsound philosophy and #2 having zero judgment.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | September 10, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

"Do all of the people moaning about the trade prefer Curry or Rubio to Wall? Because, according to line of thought being put forth, those guys would have certainly made the Wizards a better team. However, being a better team would have hurt their chances to draft Wall. So other than leaping onto another opportunity to criticize Grunfeld (who isn't going anywhere any time soon) what's the point? Can't have it both ways.

Posted by: kalo_rama | September 9, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

"And that decision is being critisized."

Except there's no point to criticizing that decision because it's a done deal. Nothing about it can be changed or altered going forward. And since it lead (however indirectly) to helping the team land Wall, no one should want anything about it to change. That is not the same thing as criticizing a player for failing to improve or live up to his potential because that is something that can and should change and does have future implications."

This is faulty thinking Kalo. Grunfeld didn't do what he did so we could land Wall. He has to be judged on the merits of the decision, and the quality of the thought process that went into making the decision in the first place. If a GM and coach make a series of draft day decisions and trades that are so bad, that the team completely craters, and somehow lands a first pick in the Manning draft year in football ('98), or the LeBron year in hoops ('03), it doesn't mean they're geniuses, it means they're idiots, and simply had incredibly good fortune in when they completely cratered.

What we want is a GM that can be trusted with the rebuild. If he can be as moronic as he was in '09, then he can certainly botch the potential this rebuild has with Wall at its center. This isn't empty kevetching for complaining's sake, this is a genuine indictment of the line of thinking that ended w/us w/the 5th best chance of getting Wall.

It's irrelevant that fortune finally smiled upon us after kicking sand in our collective eyes for 25 lotteries. Grunfeld didn't plan any of that nonsense. It's not about the fact that having Curry or Rubio or Jennings might have put us in the 2 slot, 3 slot, 5 slot or 10 slot, and lessened our chances of landing Wall, again, Grunfeld's decisions had nothing to do with Wall's draft and everything to do with vastly overestimating the talent base and ability of the franchise, fear of losing his job (after the coach was s-canned early in the past year), and the one last run for Pollin deal.

The argument that what Grunfeld did was fine since we got Wall is completely and totally without a logical base or any sound reasoning behind it. We need to focus on his decision making, his expectations, and the results, and his ability to look at what happened and make a quality assessment of the efficacy of the decision making and overarching process.

The fact that he can look at this a year later, and still approve it is an indictment, not a recommendation his methods.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | September 10, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I agree that EG judgement on 09 draft was completely wrong but then again I wonder if he would have picked someone else we could have won or lost more games and it could have possibly alter the draft selection for us and John Wall would not be with us therefore I am happy but I still think EG is not the right answer for this team ..

Posted by: svafai2000 | September 10, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

the question that would come to my mind would be,would we be better with rubio or curry in three years from now or would the cast of players we have on the roster now be better in three years? i vote for the players now because they are right in the right wheelhouse for age and experience that would make them at their competitive best,old enough to be physical without being penalized by the refs and young enough to be athletic enough for a up tempo game which they must have to win right now.

Posted by: bru4bon42z | September 12, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company